1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
|
Return-Path: <pete@petertodd.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D308B273
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 22 Jun 2015 19:23:20 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from outmail149043.authsmtp.co.uk (outmail149043.authsmtp.co.uk
[62.13.149.43])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7382F15E
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 22 Jun 2015 19:23:19 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-c235.authsmtp.com (mail-c235.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.235])
by punt17.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t5MJNCk8025141;
Mon, 22 Jun 2015 20:23:12 +0100 (BST)
Received: from savin.petertodd.org (75-119-251-161.dsl.teksavvy.com
[75.119.251.161]) (authenticated bits=128)
by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t5MJN9QZ005383
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);
Mon, 22 Jun 2015 20:23:11 +0100 (BST)
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 15:23:09 -0400
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20150622192308.GA23545@savin.petertodd.org>
References: <CABsx9T2HegqOBqd1jijk1bZBE6N+NH8x6nfwbaoLBACVf8-WBQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="J/dobhs11T7y2rNN"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CABsx9T2HegqOBqd1jijk1bZBE6N+NH8x6nfwbaoLBACVf8-WBQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Server-Quench: 1f6b56fe-1914-11e5-b396-002590a15da7
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR
aQdMdAAUEkAaAgsB AmMbWVReUl57WGE7 bA9PbARUfEhLXhtr
VklWR1pVCwQmRRl8 fGAXM3NydwBFcH0+ ZERgVngVXRJ8J0N7
FBtJFGQHYXphaTUa TRJbfgVJcANIexZF O1F6ACIKLwdSbGoL
FQ4vNDcwO3BTJTpg Ci0XJFwOCWwqJnZu Dx4DDTgjWFYORyg/
MhgrYlQYG00Sel4z I1ZpWFQTKRIbEQA2
X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1023:706
X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255)
X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 75.119.251.161/587
X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own
anti-virus system.
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Draft BIP : fixed-schedule block size increase
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 19:23:21 -0000
--J/dobhs11T7y2rNN
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 02:18:19PM -0400, Gavin Andresen wrote:
> I promised to write a BIP after I'd implemented
> increase-the-maximum-block-size code, so here it is. It also lives at:
> https://github.com/gavinandresen/bips/blob/blocksize/bip-8MB.mediawiki
It's important that we see a wide range of realistic testing of what an
8MB limit could look in the near future. An important part of that
testing is load testing.
As of writing the BIP above has no mention of what switchover rules will
be used for testnet; code floating around has August 1st 2015 as that
date. I propose we use August 1st 2013.
This switch over date should be set in the _past_ to allow for the
creation (via reorg) of a realistic full-load blockchain on testnet to
fully test the real-world behavior of the entire infrastructure
ecosystem, including questions like the scalability of block explorers,
SPV wallets, feasibility of initial syncronization, scalability of the
UTXO set, etc. While this is of course inconvenient - 2 years of 8MB
blocks is 840GB worth of data - the Bitcoin ecosystem can-not afford to
make a change like this blindly.
I'm sure with a $3.5 billion market cap at stake we can scrape together
the resources to voluntarily run a few hundred full-load full-nodes for
testing a change with the potential to destroy that market cap.
--=20
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
00000000000000000b953816d4c31e79b04d5b075bcacb8cf20e54ee3b61c316
--J/dobhs11T7y2rNN
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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==
=FZO8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--J/dobhs11T7y2rNN--
|
